Could the Guaranteed Annual Income -- once considered radical notion -- now be an idea whose time has come? It has been supported by generations of economists and welfare theorists, from the left and the right. So why are such a broad group of people pushing such a program?

For the last 30 years or so, Canadians have repeatedly flagged healthcare as the most important national concern and the issue they want their political leaders to prioritize. Surveys and studies and polls and panels -- there have been plenty -- all come up with the same finding: Canadians care about healthcare.

A recent court challenge before the British Columbia Supreme Court threatened to change the rules of the game for the Canadian healthcare system -- should the challenge have made its way to the Supreme Court of Canada and found success there. How our health system should be reformed, and in what measures, is nothing short of a national pastime in Canada. Too bad many get the facts wrong. Here are a few basics everyone should know.

It seems there is a disconnect between Canadians' personal views and their idea of how well the health system works for society at large. Canadians tout the public health care model as a big part of our national identity, say their experiences are mostly positive -- but then worry the system is failing.

It is easy to assume that the real problem with our health care system is "not enough" -- not enough physicians, not enough MRIs, not enough money. In fact, sometimes more care -- specifically care that you don't need -- can be harmful for your health, and expose you to unnecessary risks.

Let's face it: most people don't want a heart transplant or a hip replaced just because they're free. So what do user fees really discourage? They discourage the frugal and the poor from getting the care they really need.